Bill Nye slams creationism
August 27th, 2012
11:31 AM ET

Bill Nye slams creationism

By Eric Marrapodi, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor
[twitter-follow screen_name='EricCNNBelief']

(CNN)–Famed TV scientist Bill Nye is slamming creationism in a new online video for Big Think titled "Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children."

"Denial of evolution is unique to the United States," Nye begins in a YouTube video posted on Thursday.  The video quickly picked up steam over the weekend and as of Monday morning had been viewed more than 1,100,000 times.

Nye - a mechanical engineer and television personality best known for his program, "Bill Nye the Science Guy" - said the United States has great capital in scientific knowledge and "when you have a portion of the population that doesn't believe in it, it holds everyone back."

"Your world becomes fantastically complicated if you don't believe in evolution," Nye said in the Web video.

Creationists are a vast and varied group in the United States.  Most creationists believe in the account of the origins of the world as told in the Book of Genesis, the first book of the Bible.

CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories

In the creation account, God creates Adam and Eve, the world, and everything in it in six days.

For Christians who read the Genesis account literally, or authoritatively as they would say, the six days in the account are literal 24-hour periods and leave no room for evolution.  Young Earth creationists use this construct and biblical genealogies to determine the age of the Earth, and typically come up with 6,000 to 10,000 years.

Your Take: 5 reactions to Bill Nye's creationism critique

The Gallup Poll has been tracking Americans' views on creation and evolution for the past 30 years.  In June it released its latest findings, which showed 46% of Americans believed in creationism, 32% believed in evolution guided by God, and 15% believed in atheistic evolution.

During the 30 years Gallup has conducted the survey, creationism has remained far and away the most popular answer, with 40% to 47% of Americans surveyed saying they believed that God created humans in their present form at one point within the past 10,000 years.

Survey: Nearly half of Americans subscribe to creationist view of human origins

"The idea of deep time of billions of years explains so much of the world around us. If you try to ignore that, your worldview becomes crazy, untenable, itself inconsistent," Nye said in the video.

"I say to the grownups, if you want to deny evolution and live in your world, that's completely inconsistent with the world we observe, that's fine.  But don't make your kids do it.  Because we need them.  We need scientifically literate voters and taxpayers for the future.  We need engineers that can build stuff and solve problems," he said.

Creationists' beliefs about the origins of the Earth are often a narrow focus, based in large part on religious beliefs, and while they reject evolution as "just one theory," they often embrace other fields of science and technology.

Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter

In "The Genesis Flood," the 1961 book that in many ways help launch the Young Earth creationism movement in the United States, the authors write: “Our conclusions must unavoidably be colored by our Biblical presuppositions, and this we plainly acknowledge."  Their goal for the book was to harmonize the scientific evidence with the accounts in Genesis of creation and the flood.

The idea of creationism has been scorned by the mainstream scientific community since shortly after Darwin introduced "The Origin of Species" in 1859.  By 1880, The American Naturalists, a science journal, reported nearly every major university in America was teaching evolution.

"In another couple centuries I'm sure that worldview won't even exist.  There's no evidence for it. So..." Nye ends his video.

- CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

Filed under: Creationism • Science

soundoff (14,640 Responses)
  1. polycarp pio

    Read the genisis account carefully in the KJV bible, you will notice the word REPLENISH several times. The earth is aged, mankind made in the image of God is only 8,000 years old. If you carefully study the bible you will find strong hints at a pre adamic creation, that is why you find aged skeletal remains that date back many millions of years, but you will never find the "missing link" because though we have the same creator, there is a disconnect when the earth became void and without form in Genesis 1:2. Its all there but many of you have never studied the bible in depth and just assumed it was a bunch of nonsense, the answers to the very big questions are there if you will take the time to find out, but then again maybe your afraid to find out that God is truly what the bible says he is. PP Pax Et Bonum.

    August 28, 2012 at 6:09 am |
    • WASP

      @tio pio:) you do know ofcourse atleast 90% of atheists were once religious; and through our interactions with religious people we have had to study not one religion but all religions so we can defend our stance against the ignorance thrown at us everyday.

      August 28, 2012 at 6:15 am |
    • Hank

      No thanks, I stopped reading mythology when I was a kid 🙂

      August 28, 2012 at 6:15 am |
    • saggyroy

      @WASP: Yes. The quickest way to atheism is to read the bible.

      August 28, 2012 at 6:19 am |
    • SPW

      8,000 years isn't long enough to even be considered realistic

      August 28, 2012 at 6:19 am |
    • mique

      Read a textbook carefully and you will learn something.

      August 28, 2012 at 6:24 am |
    • gabe

      When you say "missing link", which one are you talking about? We have already found numerous links, every time we do however, the creationist come back and say "aha! that created another link!" We are lucky to have the fossil evidence that we do, but if it were to all be wiped out today, we would still have more than enough evidence to PROVE evolution with genetics and the triangulation of species on our planet. Anyone who says that evolution can not be true because of "missing links" clearly does not understand evolution. If you expect Atheists to educate themselves on your religion, you could at least read an impartial book or website and educate yourself on their point of view.

      August 28, 2012 at 6:43 am |
    • Elopez4024

      All sorts of missing links have been found, including the one linking marine life to earth walking. I can recite many Egyptian or Greek myths, if you want. Read a textbook on the matter, not the Bible. Jewish fairy tales dont teach science. Actually, they predate modern science (Galileo) by about 1300 years. Start making some sense, please.

      August 28, 2012 at 7:04 am |
  2. LT

    He sounds as idiotic as he looks.

    August 28, 2012 at 6:06 am |
    • WASP

      @LT: but believeing in "the flintstones" type situation makes so much better sense................. or that an all powerful being just decided to "throw the dice" and see what happens, even though he is all knowing and there wouldn't be such thing a "chance" with a "god".

      August 28, 2012 at 6:19 am |
  3. Seethrough

    Ahteism/Evolution is a terrible religion.

    August 28, 2012 at 6:04 am |
    • WASP

      @see: atheism is the LACK OF BELIEF IN ANY GOD. thus not a religion
      evolution is the explaination as to how humans evolved based on FACTS, not fairy tales that have horrible endings........someone tell the crackpot that wrote the bible bed times stories are suppose to have a happy ending.

      August 28, 2012 at 6:23 am |
    • Seethrough

      I disagree. No one has ever observed any big bang, stellar evolution, chemical evolution or biological evolution. All which are required for evolution. Atheists have to have faith these things happened.(never mind all the other unexplained unobserved things) Faith is the cornerstone of religion. They also give all the attributes of God to nature. Therefore it's a religion. Another new age religion.

      August 28, 2012 at 6:44 am |
    • gabe

      @ seethrough.........Atheist have never observed any biological evolution? Really? Have you ever heard of the flu? There's a reason you have to get a new flu shot every year.........because it EVOLVES.

      August 28, 2012 at 7:21 am |
  4. RadZap


    August 28, 2012 at 5:43 am |
    • saggyroy

      It's turtles all the way down baby !

      August 28, 2012 at 6:10 am |
  5. Curmudgeon Creationist

    Interesting how Bill ignores the glaring violations of scientific laws that Evolution Theory violates. First off, everything starts off with the ridiculous spontaneous generation of life. Their smoke and mirrors mathematical proof which basically inviolate itself by starting with a open system domain which is a subset of a closed system this starting assumption violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The universe is a closed system and if you have such a massive decrease in entropy that this event suggest, it has to balance somewhere else with a massive increase.

    Another problem is their "lighting striking a pool of muck" starter event assumes that entropy and energy are interchangeable the way matter and energy are. There's no such physical law so that throws out your starter event. Add on top of that that its far far more likely, as one wise teacher has stated, for a tornado to hit a junkyard and spontaneously generate a 747 aircraft than for lightning to strike muck and spontaneously generate even the simplest virus which is orders of magnitude more complex. Anyone seen some 747's suddenly appear in any junkyards anywhere? 😛

    And as for the world environment remaining the same and evolution slowly occurring over billions of years, that's baloney too. At current atmospheric pressure, nothing larger than an elephant can breath but we have fossils of things far larger, in fact some would require about 2.5 atmospheres for their lungs to work. So if things have always been like they've been for billions of years, how to they account for the sudden lose of 60% of our atmosphere sometime in the past? And we know it was a sudden event because some of these fossils still had undigested grass in their bellies when they died. That invalidates all their carbon dating they keep beating us over the head with and limits their usefulness to the span of recorded history. Also if conditions are so constant, why does a mountain lake in South America, full of fresh water, have salt water species in it? More physical evidence in the world that shows what these guys say is BS.

    Also, get it right about this christian age of the world thing. Biblical genealogies can not be used to date the earth because the correct translations is "descendant of" not "son of" but that dumb monk that came up with that didn't catch that fact. Nice how Bill stands that straw man up though and knocks it down.

    Fact is Biil, Evolution has already been disproven over and over. Fanatics like you just keep bringing it up because the alternative is too scary for you to accept. If all matter, energy, life, and everything we know is artificial then someone made it all and someone owns it all, including you.

    August 28, 2012 at 5:33 am |
    • Mieper101

      You try to soung like a scientist, but you obviously are not. Your reasoning is simplistic and makes no sense. Sorry.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:44 am |
    • Sedmic

      Despite the exceptions, evolution is a far more complete and unifying explanation than anything creationism or intelligent design ever offered. Fewer exceptions -> better theory.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:55 am |
    • Jennifer

      Why do creationist think "god" is a simpleton???? Heck even the pope knows better....

      August 28, 2012 at 5:58 am |
    • Zenferret

      Considering that you've started your post with a conflagration of evolution and abiogenesis, it's pretty clear that your attempts at discussion are limited by your ignorance of evolution. Thanks for proving Mr. Nye's point. Educate yourself, then try again.

      August 28, 2012 at 6:00 am |
    • john spampinato

      Believing in paper,and old books is SO reliable! haahhahah

      August 28, 2012 at 6:05 am |
    • Colin

      CC, You said
      "First off, everything starts off with the ridiculous spontaneous generation of life. Their smoke and mirrors mathematical proof which basically inviolate itself by starting with a open system domain which is a subset of a closed system this starting assumption violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics."

      The second law of thermodynamics operates in a closed system in which no energy enters. The Earth is not a closed system. There is an enormous amount of energy streaming into the planet every second. Ever heard of the sun? Of solar energy?

      You said

      "Another problem is their "lighting striking a pool of muck" starter event assumes that entropy and energy are interchangeable the way matter and energy are. There's no such physical law so that throws out your starter event. Add on top of that that its far far more likely, as one wise teacher has stated, for a tornado to hit a junkyard and spontaneously generate a 747 aircraft than for lightning to strike muck and spontaneously generate even the simplest virus which is orders of magnitude more complex. Anyone seen some 747's suddenly appear in any junkyards anywhere?"

      It was actually Fred Hoyle who said that. But the analogy has a flaw. No evolutionary biologist I know of thinks life magically appeared all of a sudden in a single "lighning strike" or other singular event. I have never read such a thing in any science book ever.

      Ironically, the only books I am aware of that makes the ridiculous assertion that life popped out of nonliving matter in a single event are the Torah and it’s derivatives, the Bible and Qu’ran. Your own argument negates the validity of the very belief you aspire to.

      The theory most scientists currently favor for the origins of life is called “abiogenesis,” the gradual emergence of life on Earth from non-living matter. To understand why it is thought that life arose on Earth from non-living matter, one has to understand some basic biochemistry. This is where you “talking snake crowd” tend have such a problem. You have to actually understand some very basic science, you can’t just rely on what you were taught at Sunday school as an eight year-old.

      All life is comprised of complex arrangements of proteins, fats and carbohydrates, all orchestrated by DNA and/or RNA. DNA/RNA and proteins are by far the most important components of a living organism, carrying out virtually every function in a cell. Fats and carbohydrates are generally simpler molecules and play critical, but subordinate roles in cells.

      DNA and RNA are made of five nucleotides – adenine, thymine, cytosine, guanine and uracil. They act as the cell’s “mission control,” orchestrating the cell’s activities. Proteins are made of 20 amino acids. They are the workhorse of the cell – the nails, wood, steel beams and machinery that make the cell run. It is the order of amino acids in a protein that determine its shape and, therefore what it does. This order and shape of proteins is itself dictated by the DNA through RNA.

      So, in short, life is made up of complex arrangements of:

      The five nucleotides – adenine, thymine, cytosine, guanine and uracil – arranged into DNA and/or RNA
      The twenty amino acids – that form all proteins, including enzymes and the other 100,000 or so proteins in a complex organism’s body.
      Carbohydrates – literally “water-carbon,” which include sugars and starches. These are much simpler elements than proteins or DNA/RNA and act as an energy source.
      Fats – also called lipids, these are important in constructing cell membranes.

      The simplest cells are prokaryotic cells. They exist today principally as bacteria. Stromatolites and other fossils from all over the planet suggest that, for the first billion years of life on earth, all life was simple, prokaryotic life. These cells consisted of a fatty cell membrane, like a balloon skin, with DNA/RNA, proteins, fats and carbohydrates on the inside. They had no nucleus. Cells with nuclei, called eukaryotic cells (which make up virtually all multi-cellular organisms) are much larger and more complex that prokaryotic cells and likely resulted from the early combining of prokaryotic cells.

      So, can a simple prokaryotic cell come into existence without the intervention of God, Allah, Shiva, Vishnu, Yahweh or any other divine/magic being?

      Beginning in the 1950s, scientists started trying to mimic the conditions on the early Earth to see whether some kind of “life-fairy” was necessary to get things started. In the most famous experiment of this era, the Miller-Urey experiment of 1952, Stanley Miller demonstrated that heating and running an electric spark through an atmosphere of water vapor, ammonia, methane and hydrogen for a few weeks resulted in these very simple molecules self-assembling into all 20 of the amino acids upon which life on Earth is based. This is a startling result. All 20 building blocks of proteins, which comprise over 99% of the cell’s functional structures, self-assembling without a magic wand from God, Shiva, Vishnu, Allah etc!

      The experiment was groundbreaking because it suggested that, under the perfectly natural conditions of early Earth, the building blocks of life can and will self-assemble. Indeed, it now seems that major volcanic eruptions 4 billion years ago would have created an even more diverse atmosphere than Miller used, including carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen (N2), hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and sulfur dioxide (SO2). When these were added to the mix in subsequent experiments, they have resulted in the creation of all 5 nucleotides, all 20 amino acids and basic fatty membranes and various carbohydrates. That is to say, with no magic/divine intervention, all life’s building blocks WILL self-assemble.

      But nails, wood, wiring and bricks a house do not make. Even the simplest life requires these building blocks to be arranged in very, very complex ways. In various experiments with various conditions, scientists have been able to create a wide range of cell-like structures of increasing complexity on the road toward a simple self-replicating organism. These creations are called protobionts or coacervates and if you “you tube” or google these terms, you will see many examples.

      This is still a far cry from a cell, but the important thing is that the experiments uniformly demonstrate that organic molecules have a natural tendency to clump together in increasingly complex ways under early Earth-like conditions. They are not being pushed into doing something “against their will” or against the second law of thermodynamics (remember the sun).

      Where it gets really suggestive is that scientists have been able to isolate what they believe to be some of the most primitive genes of Earth, by comparing the DNA of two organisms whose last common ancestor lived soon after the formation of the Earth. For such genes to be common to both such organisms, they must be very, very old. When these ancient genes produce amino acids, they are rich in the amino acids most common in the Miller-Urey and similar experiments! This suggests that these experiments do indeed reflect early Earth conditions and that life itself did arise under such conditions.

      The other important factor is that these impressive results have been achieved in laboratories over small periods of time. Imagine the whole Earth as the “Petri dish” and hundreds of millions of years as the timescale. Simple life gradually emerging from such a “soup” does not seem at all incredible, certainly not incredible enough that we in the USA have to give up and call the remaining gap in knowledge “God,” while our Indian colleagues do the same and attribute it all to the Lord Shiva.

      Scientist are also approaching it from the other side too, gradually stripping away at prokaryotic cells to see how stripped down they have to become for life to “stop,” while others continue to build up from coacervates and protobionts. The gap is narrowing as our knowledge continues its inexorable march.

      The Christian sky-fairy is being pinched out! There’s not a lot of room left for him now. The pincers of science are closing in from both sides, squeezing out the phantom of religion and ignorance. Soon, the two sides of the pincer will meet and this unnecessary holdover will have to flutter off and find another dark corner to settle in, where the penetrating light of science and knowledge has not yet shone. Fortunately, the weak, forgiving mind of the creationist will always be there for him, acting as an eternal refuge from enlightenment and advancement.

      As to your arguments against evolution, unfortunately your post betrays a woeful ignorance of science. It took about 3 billion years of Earth history after life first arose for life to achieve the complexity it has today. The process is well understood. Starting with a "simple" organism (and I say "simple" because even the simplest of organisms are complex, but I addressed that above) all of the offspring of that organism will all be slightly different to their parent, and to each other. No boy is identical in EVERY respect to his father.

      Those organisms with the traits that best suit it to survive are more likely to pass on their genes (and that advantageous trait) to their own offspring. A slightly faster lion, taller giraffe or better sighted hawk is more likely than its slower, shorter or more myopic brethren to live long enough to breed and pass on the favorable genes that gave it the edge. No rocket science there.

      So far, easy, but here is the key and the thing creationists don't seem able (or, perhaps, willing) to grasp. The way in which any child will differ from its parents will generally be small (such as eye color, height etc.) but, given enough time and enough generations, and provided some external element is selectively favoring specific traits, such as acute eyesight, the differences will add up. Over thousands of generations, so much cu.mulative change builds up that the great-great-great etc. grandson will be so different from its great-great-great etc. grandfather as to amount to a new species.

      If, for example, a dog breeder only ever allows the fastest male dogs to breed with the fastest female dogs, after many years of such selective breeding the resultant dogs will differ so much in body shape, leg length and, perhaps, lung capacity from their ancestor as to be considered a separate breed. No one set of offspring will differ greatly from its parents, but it will differ a little more from its grandparents, and even a little more from its great-grandparents etc., until we go all the way back to the original dog, which will be quite different in appearance.

      We see this around us everywhere. Ever heard of greyhounds, the most obvious example of breeding for speed? Very different to bulldogs, aren’t they. All breeds of dog alive today descended from wolves. In fact, it is likely that they all descended, ultimately, from a small pack of wolves that were domesticated in either the Middle East or Manchuria some 10,000 years ago. In any event, every last one of them, from the Teacup Chihuahua in Paris Hilton’s purse to the Great Danes of European car advertisements, are the cu.mulative result of selective breeding down different paths from the original wolf.

      Now, what are the chances of two wolves giving birth to a Chihuahua or Dalmatian? Virtually zero, but this ignores (like your 747 example once again does) all of the intermediate steps – the generations – the tint steps – required to get from a wolf to a Chihuahua. It took 10,000 years, about 5,000 generations – 5,000 baby steps. I could not jump from New York to San Francisco, but I could certainly walk there in little steps.

      Evolution is, in fact, a work in process, as dog breeders all over the world, along with horse breeders, wheat farmers, rose growers, cattle farmers and all other professions that depend on the traits of plants or animals to make their living, selectively breed for desired traits. Why do you think horse breeders pay thousands of dollars for the fastest stud horses to breed with their mares?

      Even the most cursory of research into any branch of horticulture or animal husbandry quickly reveals that the size, variety, health, longevity and resistance to disease of most of our domesticated plants and animals were the thing of dreams as recently as 100 years ago. Indeed, biotech companies like Monsanto would quickly fall behind the competi.tion if they did not spend millions each year on Darwinian selective breeding programs.

      You really think that people in the 1500s ate fruit and vegetables of the size, nutritional value and taste we do today? Hell, there are hundreds of types of apple today. They did not exist a few centuries ago. Why do diseases “build up” a resistance to antibiotics. Individual bacteria don’t, but antibiotics sometimes only kill 99% of the bacteria, leaving a few individuals to breed and pass on the trait that allowed them to survive the antibiotic to their offspring. Gradually, these survivors and their descendents will outnumber the original, weaker disease. A new, more resistant strain of the disease has just evolved. Or did your all loving god create the new, virulent strain in an effort to kill people?

      Now, to go back to the point I left open at the start of this post, what evolution does not explain (nor attempt to) is how the first complex living things arose. However, as I said, the more we understand biological processes, the more we are seeing that there is a natural tendency for non-living organic compounds to clump together into increasingly complex forms. Experiments show this all the time. No step in the process of gradually increasing complexity of organic molecules into simple life seems to be too complex to have happened without divine intervention. It just took a long, long time – hundreds of millions of years, and a big, big "Petri dish" – the entire Earth-before it occurred, perhaps even more than once.

      Finally, even if we were to assume that [the Christian] god created the first living cell, where does that get us? We immediately bump into the question of what created that god? God was always there, right? But this is the same as saying he "just happened" and God is even less likely than a 747 or a simple cell is to have "just happened." In fact, why is “God” considered an explanation for anything. It isn’t. It’s a cop out, a shrug of the shoulders. When a person attributes something to God, it usually means they haven’t got a clue, so they invoke a magic act by some unreachable, unknowable sky-fairy. All we have done is put a halo on a question mark and walked away from the challenge.

      Frankly, would any believer, absent having been taught it from when they were too young to question it, possibly conclude the existence of a creator-god as a thinking adult, based on what we know in science today? Much less the one that is straight out of late Iron Age Palestinian mythology.

      PS: The sky-fairy analogy is not original. It is cited in Dawkins as being from an unnamed blogger.

      PPS: I did not distinguish between “breeds” and “species” but that is simply a matter of degree of exactly the same process. Accepting one but not the other is like accepting the existence of inches but denying the existence of miles.

      August 28, 2012 at 6:14 am |
    • the_dude


      what the fuck does 'inviolate itself' mean?

      August 28, 2012 at 6:23 am |
    • anonymous

      higgs boson was the start of the universe and the dinos went extinct from the fall out of an asteroid hitting the Earth. The asteroid even has a name and we know where it came from. Creationism will eventually go the way of those who believed the earth is flat. Hopefully the USA will still be at the top by the time undeniable proof is obtained. The more the USA continues to deny scientific fact the more our test scores will drop. Eventually we will loose our place as one of the top countries. I hope I never see this in my lifetime. We need to wake up to the fact that our school system needs a revamping. Something is very wrong when presidential candidates (both sides) have to dumb down their speeches to an 8th grade level in order to reach their audience,

      August 28, 2012 at 6:23 am |
  6. Burt

    Atheism is the trendiest fad going right now. Have fun riding around on your band wagon. The wheels will come off eventually.

    August 28, 2012 at 5:21 am |
    • sam stone

      The trendiest fad? Wow....just wow. Get back on your knees

      August 28, 2012 at 5:25 am |
    • Kebos

      I hardly doubt that. Atheism is no more a fad than eating three meals a day. Religion is not a fad either but merely a genetic propensity for some to believe anything they're told.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:26 am |
    • damo12345

      Science is not a trend. Logic is not a trend.

      93% of the National Academy of Sciences are atheists. That's the country's largest and foremost scientific society. Our numbers grow, especially among the educated, for a reason.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:26 am |
    • Bob

      Don't you know that God is an atheist? How do you insult him with your blasphemy.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:30 am |
    • BOBBY

      you are the poster child for stupidity and also are just the kind of idiot he is talking about.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:30 am |
    • usmc1999

      atheism is trendy? it is funny, i wonder what the ancient Greeks thought as their mythology religion was starting to sputter out? i wonder what the ancient Egyptians thought as their religion started to sputter out? i wonder what the ancient Romans thought as their religion started to sputter out? the point is, all through history people have believed in something and truly believed their religion was the true religion. but just as sure, each of those have eventually faded away. a thousand years from now they will say the same thing about the religions of today.

      August 28, 2012 at 6:37 am |
  7. Truth

    Can someone explain where all the building blocks of the universe came from? From what I can see atheistic evolutionists beleive there was nothing at all and then it exploded. Which makes absolutely no sense! And if the makeup of the universe has always been there where did it come from?

    August 28, 2012 at 5:17 am |
    • Simran

      Yes truth, I will agree to your answer that it came from God if you can give me the answer "Where did god come from?"

      August 28, 2012 at 5:19 am |
    • Jon O

      How is that different from what you believe?

      There was nothing, then all of a sudden – poof – there was everything, created by a God whose origin you do not question at all. Which is irresponsiible and lazy.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:23 am |
    • Ra

      Nothing makes sense for those that believed in Ra, the Sun God! You've not evolved much! 🙂

      August 28, 2012 at 5:23 am |
    • seattlekarma

      Who says, "There was nothing at all, and then it exploded?" Nobody knows the answer to the question you're asking, and we're not likely to ever know the answer. It's a good question nonetheless...but only science, not religion, stands any real chance of ever answering it.

      Saying God created it is a cop-out and provides no answers, since we can now ask, "Ok, then where did God come from?" It puts you back at square one. It is entirely possible, as you point out, that everything has always been there, in which case the question is moot. Why does it have to "come from" anywhere? Maybe it's just always been here, always.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:25 am |
    • Simran

      At least the scientists state they dont know everything, that they are trying to figure out the answers. Unlike the Christians who seem to have a recorded tape going on – God did it, God did it! And why is it that no other religion (cant speak for Islam, maybe we can say no religion other than Abrahamic religions) seems to be worried about evolution or big bang or science. One third of the world'w population (now I cant say how many of these Christians actually believe creationism) seems to be living in a world of delusion.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:26 am |
    • damo12345

      Came from? They didn't come from anywhere. There is no data supporting the hypothesis that there was any state of "oblivion" before the existence of reality.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:30 am |
    • BOBBY

      its called "matter"

      August 28, 2012 at 5:32 am |
    • sam stone

      truth: tell me how it follows that a creator becomes a being who judges human interaction

      August 28, 2012 at 5:35 am |
  8. asche

    what's worse than believing in creationism in the face of science? calling this a slam. THIS is a slam? please, believe in creationism if you want but stop being liar sensationalist overreacting fools, immediately.

    August 28, 2012 at 5:15 am |
  9. Chuckhashman

    As for Charles Darwin--Satan personally taught him his theories and he revealed himself to him!! The Devil and his servants can all rot in hell!!!!! As a child i personally saw this evil which is in a black shadow/silhouette of a man with glowing red eyes that can levitate above the ground!! I have a witness –it was no dream!! Satan is the enemy of all MANKIND!! God is mans only hope!!! tHIS MESSAGE is only the truth and a warning!!

    August 28, 2012 at 5:07 am |
    • Blarg

      BWA hahahahahaha! That is rich, you're good, you should take your show on the road.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:11 am |
    • Huh?

      How's the Kool Ade treating you buddy?

      August 28, 2012 at 5:12 am |
    • AtheistJoe

      Shut it chuck you loney christian freak!! We are going to take your childrens souls whether you like it or not. Pu.ss.y and pot will rot their brains and your god will cease to exist!!!

      August 28, 2012 at 5:12 am |
    • sam stone

      Stay away from the Brown Acid.....

      August 28, 2012 at 6:19 am |
    • funnyguyd

      You are all being trolled.

      August 31, 2012 at 7:53 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Gee. Ya think?

      August 31, 2012 at 7:56 pm |
  10. G>>N>>

    Good for all of you that takes this mans word for it that there is no god..
    So when did he get back from his fact finding expedition from the far reaches of the universe to have gained this knowledge???
    Because surely his word is as good as anyone else's..If he hasn't been there. .ISN'T IT??

    August 28, 2012 at 5:06 am |
    • Secular Humanist Fred

      To argue from ignorance is surely one of the most useless and ignorant things a person could do. Well done.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:08 am |
    • G>>N>>

      So a scientist tells you, without ever getting beyond earth.. That there is NO God out there..
      You you believe him???
      And you ridicule those that believe in God??
      Seems we both believe what we believe because of faith..YOu believe what some scientist tells you.. Others believe what men who said they met Christ and saw acts of God and heard his voice..Have written in a book called the bible.
      So what really is the difference between your faith and "our" fatih..?
      It all based on faith one way or another.
      I choose ot have faith in t hose that wrote the bible..
      YOu have faith is science..
      And you dare to sneer?

      August 28, 2012 at 5:17 am |
    • Candi

      I see no ignorance in G>>N>>'s comments, but I see a lot of arrogance from the other side.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:17 am |
    • Simran

      Science doesnot tell you there is no god. Science doesnot comment upon religion. Please get that straight.

      It is the other way around, religion seems to be trying to influence scientific research and teachings, in a vain attempt to maintain its hold on humanity. Religions have come and gone. Christianity itself dealt a blow to several religions if you read history.

      Now, if you want creationism to be taught to my kid in school, I will stand up and ask – first prove it. And if school curriculum has to be influenced by religion, then why your religion, why not mine???
      Concept of god is itself so conflicting among various religions, everyone says their's is the only way – some believe in one god, some many, some say the whole idea of creation is meaningless (Refer Buddhism). Now which one of you is right?
      Unlike you, science is not fighting among its various specialities – rather they join hands – cosmology with astrophysics, evolutionary biology, metaphysics – everyone is together in the search for more knowledge and constant seeking.

      The truth Sir is that reliigon is a social concept, not a scientific one.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:38 am |
    • G>>N>>

      Such hateful people..
      Well Its all about being harsh, cruel and mean.. Then Atheism works for ya~!
      Won't argue that it is definitely "workin for ya'~!!!

      August 28, 2012 at 5:46 am |
    • Simran

      Exactly what part of my comment is harsh or hateful? Do tell!
      Or please elaborate on teh issues I raised.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:51 am |
  11. KLN

    It takes more faith to believe that we are the product of random molecules colliding than creationism. How does a human body with it's millions of complex cells and systems come from a random explosion in the universe? It doesn't take a scientest to look around at our world and realize this diversity was from a divine Creator. By the way, the vast majority of Christians do believe in evolutionism. We just also believe that there is no scientific evidence that humans evolved from animals or that species of animals evolved into other species. Is there scientific evidence for that? No. Darwin admitted that until that is proven, his theory is not validated.

    August 28, 2012 at 5:04 am |
    • Simran

      No dear, it took 4.5 billion years for man to evolve from that first so-called explosion. Now, do you understand how long that is?
      Or else, we can presume that God just decided to drop man from up above the heavens 50,000 yrs ago!!!
      That we have no connection with animals just speaks of how superior we consider ourselves to be – does it hurt your ego to think that the pig is just as important to the universe as we are!

      August 28, 2012 at 5:13 am |
    • Secular Humanist Fred

      Who cares what Darwin or Bill Nye says? We don't worship these people, but you seem to think we do.
      How stupid are you?
      Why don't you go pray about it some more and get back to us on exactly what your god says about it in your head – word for word. We'll certainly want to hear what sort of things you say your god says to you in your head. Oh, yes.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:15 am |
    • sam stone

      kln: why do you feel that a creator has to be a god?

      August 28, 2012 at 6:24 am |
  12. godlessveteran

    Yo, MORONS of CNN: evolution and atheism are utterly independent of each other. There is nothing specifically atheist about evolution. Though laughably unlikely, some supposed deity could have put evolution into motion just to have a laugh billions of years later. Get the picture?

    August 28, 2012 at 5:03 am |
  13. doctore0

    Who is left with the god delusion.. America, Muslim countries, Africa...

    August 28, 2012 at 5:03 am |
    • G>>N>>

      Who worships mans opinion's??
      People like you...
      So a scientist tells you, without ever getting beyond earth.. That there is NO God out there..
      You you believe him???
      And you ridicule those that believe in God??
      Seems we both believe what we believe because of faith..YOu believe what some scientist tells you.. Others believe what men who said they met Christ and saw acts of God and heard his voice..Have written in a book called the bible.
      So what really is the difference between your faith and "our" fatih..?
      It all based on faith one way or another.
      I choose ot have faith in t hose that wrote the bible..
      YOu have faith is science..
      And you dare to sneer?

      August 28, 2012 at 5:14 am |
    • Secular Humanist Fred

      Why sneer at someone suffering from schizophrenia? Well, okay, sometimes it makes me giggle, but the fact of the matter is...you are in the throes of a delusional belief system that caters to your lack of judgment, so naturally you will have a hard time understanding a non-delusional viewpoint that uses hard facts instead of delusional bias like yours.
      You will probably understand a Muslim before an atheist like me, because a Muslim will be ignorant and brainwashed just like you and this will likely produce some similarities in common between you.
      No, you are quite mistaken about a LOT of stuff, and it is difficult for someone like you to accept anything that does not "mesh" with your delusional belief system and concomitant perceptual bias you use to view pretty much everything.
      Instead of fighting against proven facts, why don't you just admit you got taken for a ride on the turnip truck and keep falling out despite hanging onto some turnips?
      Go read and learn how to not be so mistaken about so many things. Then you can be a smart-ass know-it-all like me. Sometimes being right makes me sad. No, seriously. It would be nice if magic were real, but it isn't and that sucks.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:26 am |
    • G>>N>>

      Wow Fred..
      How totally nasty and hateful..
      But, hey... Science is great.. But how many times has it been wrong.. ?
      Comes back, alters data and then says its all part of getting to the truth..?
      How many things were "facts" until scientists found they were mistaken?
      So you want to ridicule those that say 'the facts are not in Jack'~!.. The proof is not there.. You can't even get off this planet, yet you are telling me what is NOT out there? And doing it in a superior and hateful way too~!!
      Can't say being an atheist has made you a better person..Not at all..~!

      August 28, 2012 at 5:40 am |
    • Simran

      Yup GN,
      At least the scientists have the decency to come back and change their position if they find it incorrect. But what has religion done? No, they still think men have the right to suppress women, they still think it is okay to do jihad for god, they still want to impose their will on other fellow humans (refer gays) just bcoz they think theirs is the only way.... And they still cant resolve the conflicts among themselves (exaclty how many types of Christians are there in this world now?)

      August 28, 2012 at 5:47 am |
    • G>>N>>


      Oh wow.. 🙂
      Tell you what ..You BE an atheist..
      it matters not to me.. If you choose to be one, then be one.
      I certainly don't care what you believe..
      To ridicule others because you "think" you are better educated or just simply smarter for what you don't believe as opposed to what I do believe ..Is nothing but absurd.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:55 am |
    • Simran

      Now exactly where did I say I am smarter than you?
      This is an assessment made by your own mind Sir.
      This is a place for open debate and I just raised some issues. Now either give your counter-argument or stop acitng like the poor victim here dlg. 🙂

      August 28, 2012 at 6:02 am |
    • G>>N>>


      You have over estimated yourself if you think anything you have said in any way intimidates me.. And definitely underestimated me if you think I feel in any way a "victim" by your ridicule..~!
      Being "educated" does not exclude having faith..
      But you go ahead and think your own views on the subject "superior".

      August 28, 2012 at 6:09 am |
    • Simran

      The question is not about my views or your views, and we are not arguing here about your faith or mine. In my first post, I made no assumption, you made it in ur reply.
      I may want to believe anything I want to, I think I would like to believe in Buddhist philosophy. But now, I am not going to influence the system of science by my beliefs.
      Noow you still do not address the key question – which religion's philosophy should we be accepting if we do want to accept creationism???

      August 28, 2012 at 6:21 am |
    • Simran

      And that I am educated is also an assumption u make, Where did I talk about my education or urs?
      Well, will like to continue this debate, but for now, gotto go for work.

      August 28, 2012 at 6:25 am |
    • Ben R

      No, G>>N>>, I don't take what scientists tell me on faith. I read their studies. I try to understand the methodology they used, the data they collected, and the logical conclusions that they draw. Scientific theories, especially important ones such as evolution, are rigorously tested by other scientists before they are accepted by the scientific community. This rigorous testing of verifiable hypothoses is exactly what distinguishes science from faith. Your ignorance of the scientific method (as well as Christian history, but that's a whole other point) does not challenge my worldview, but rather it enhances my feeling that willful Christian ignorance is halting human progress

      August 28, 2012 at 2:06 pm |
  14. rocinante

    He really wasn't "slamming" Creationism. He was stating the common sense fact that we need our kids to be able to compete in science and engineering. Our kids aren't going to be able to compete if we don't teach them the fundamentals of science, on which all of the more advanced material is based.

    August 28, 2012 at 4:59 am |
  15. Robert

    Science at this point can't explain or prove why we are here other than a guess. So it really means nothing when an atheist tells us how stupid we are and that the Bible is fiction. Prove evolution, or admit that you also rely on faith for your beliefs. I believe in science when science can prove itself, but when it comes to the origin of the universe or how man came to exist, it can only guess.

    August 28, 2012 at 4:59 am |
    • rocinante

      Testability means that when I state a theory like gravity, you can validate it yourself. That what I've stated is consistent with your own independent tests.

      Faith means that you believe something that is entirely untestable and has no reproducible consequences whatsoever.

      Science is about testability, not faith.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:02 am |
    • Robert

      Then why do scientists present theories, big bang etc?

      August 28, 2012 at 5:04 am |
    • Michael

      If the bible is a hundred percent true why does everything in it appear in earlier religions? Nearly every ancient religion that came before Christianity has a story about a virgin birth of the son of god on Dec, 25th. Almost all of these sons of different gods exorcized demons, performed miracles, died and three days later were resurrected. Horus from ancient Egypt for example wandered the desert, was tempted by demons, performed miracles and had 12 disciples. Horus was also killed and resurrected 3 days later and that story is from 3000 BC thousands of years before Christianity. In ancient Norse mythology during Ragnarok the last man and women left alive hid in the trunk of Ygidrisil the life tree until the tumult ended. They then emerged and repopulated the Earth hmm one man and one woman filling the Earth sounds familliar this also happened before Christianity. Bottom line is that religion is another form of control a way of culling the sheep and making sure they drink the kool aid. What about Noah's Ark I'm not even God but I could think of a more efficent way to cleanse the Earth than a 40 day flood why not just vaporize all the wickedness? What about collection plates in churches if God wanted his gospel spread why wouldn't he just make gold rain from the sky or build the churches himself? Where the theory of evolution has one hole the theory of religion has hundreds!

      August 28, 2012 at 5:21 am |
    • Secular Humanist Fred

      thousands. millions. billions. trillions. okay my head just exploded.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:36 am |
  16. G>>N>>

    I love how these guys tell us there is no god. When we can't even see far enough into the universe to tell if there is other life on other planets~!!

    August 28, 2012 at 4:57 am |
    • Candi

      Good point!

      August 28, 2012 at 5:02 am |
    • Secular Humanist Fred

      Ah, sockpuppets. Reminds me of the old days.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:52 am |
    • Simran

      No body is telling you not to believe that there is no god. You have the right to believe what you want, and you wouldn't be on the defensive here if you didnot feel the carpet slipping from under your feet.
      All I want is that you should stop preaching your god to me.
      Why does it offend religious people if some others stand up and say that god doesn't exist? If god exists and you know it for sure, why does it bother you? Why do you want to justify your belief by using the handle of science?
      Why dont you start taking your kids to faith healers every time god makes them sick?

      August 28, 2012 at 5:57 am |
    • 0G-No gods, ghosts, goblins or ghouls

      By your (il)logic, there is equal probability that Santa Claus really des exist on some presently unknown planet. Anyway you slice it, believers believe sh!t without a single bit of evidence. Sounds like mental illness to me!

      August 28, 2012 at 6:04 am |
    • sam stone

      G>N and Candi: Who is telling you there is no god?

      August 28, 2012 at 6:29 am |
  17. Burl99

    When did a math idiot like Bill Nye become taken seriously as a scientific expert?? He is not even closely qualified to say the things he says. Are we letting a mechanical engineer tell us what science means now?Go away Bill Nye and let qualified people agree or disagree...just shut up.

    August 28, 2012 at 4:53 am |
    • damo12345

      93% of the National Academy of Sciences are atheists. That's America's largest and foremost society of scientists. If you want to attack one scientist and say he's "unqualified" to state that creationism is illogical, that's fine. There's no shortage of other scientists willing to back him up.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:32 am |
  18. mary

    So not believing there is a heavenly father and a wonderful place for us is "bad"?
    well I think teaching children they have one shot at life, and they better take from it all they can. Is what has made a mess of things..
    And aside from the fact, the theory of evolution is just that.. A "theory".
    A theory of what is "not" out there is not 'proof' ~!
    Until we explore everything. And have been to every corner of the universe.. To deny there is nothing more beyond .?
    Is just as much of a belief. As believing there is.
    Because like it or not.. There is no "proof" there is NO God....
    So I choose to believe in creation... And feel comfortable in it..

    August 28, 2012 at 4:53 am |
    • The Truth always happens.

      Ignorance is bliss, Mary. You must be one blissful dingbat.

      August 28, 2012 at 4:54 am |
    • G>>N>>

      Right back at you... You must be very satisfied thinking there is no god.. Tell me, if we can't even tell if there are other planets with life on them.. How do we "know" there is "NO" god????

      August 28, 2012 at 4:58 am |
    • That Guy Over There

      Dingbat? Really? Is that even an insult? I'm not really sure what to say to that...

      August 28, 2012 at 4:58 am |
    • Mary

      Well.. I certainly wouldn't be hateful to someone who feels different about it than i do..
      So I guess the answer is ...Yes I do feel good believing in God..
      It keeps me from being hateful to those that think different than I do.. God teaches kindness.
      So tell me? Who teaches you anything?

      August 28, 2012 at 5:02 am |
    • The Truth always happens.

      Blissful, Mary, blissful. Doesn't it bother you that there isn't a shred of evidence that a dude in the sky exists and that you are wasting a percentage of the time you have on earth believing in something some snake oil salesmen conjured up two thousand years ago to gain power? God is a concept. Religion should be barred from school and any credible education process.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:07 am |
    • Candi

      I think that was Archie Bunker that called you a dingbat, Mary.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:09 am |
    • Mary

      Yes.. I think its funny that people trust so much in science.. And yet all they do is discover what is already there..

      Some day when man gets beyond looking at stars and can actually get there. I might think they have more qualification to tell others what is or is not 'out there'..
      Unitl then..It is about faith... All of it.. Even them..
      Its faith .. Casue there is no proof there isn't a God.

      August 28, 2012 at 5:32 am |
    • sam stone

      mary: and there is no "proof" there are no leprechauns. what is your point?

      August 28, 2012 at 6:39 am |
  19. That Guy Over There

    Bill Nye the mechanical engineer-wannabe scientist guy

    August 28, 2012 at 4:49 am |
  20. Billy Bob

    So let me get this straight, we all came from Adam and Eve? Then we're all inbred. No wonder so many people still believe in the fairy tale called religion.

    August 28, 2012 at 4:49 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.